Home Angels, warriors, and beacons: Totemic law, territorial coding, and monumental sculpture in post-industrial landscapes
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Angels, warriors, and beacons: Totemic law, territorial coding, and monumental sculpture in post-industrial landscapes

  • Ronnie Lippens EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: April 14, 2017

Abstract

National or local authorities regularly commission artists to build or construct sculptures and artworks destined for a place in a public space. Some of those sculptures and artworks are monumentally huge. Positioned in the open landscape, they are visible from a considerable distance. This contribution focuses on three such sculptures in the United Kingdom. The first, “Angel of the North,” was completed in 1998 and is standing at Gateshead in the North East of England. The second, “Anglo Saxon Warrior,” has not yet been built to a massive scale – although smaller, life-size versions were – but some debate has taken place in Stoke-on-Trent in North Staffordshire in the West Midlands about the possibility and remote likelihood of its construction. The third, “Golden,” is, however, at the time of writing, in the process of being assembled with an eye on erecting it, in 2014, at the very same location, Stoke-on-Trent. Proposals for all aforementioned artworks emerged against the backdrop of regional de-industrialization and were, at least partly, devised as an answer to economic and social deprivation in both regional localities. In this contribution an effort is made to tease out the symbolic intricacies embedded in all three artworks. Although all include references to what could be called the eternal origins of a mythical common law universe, each suggests, projects, and attempts to encode a moral and legal order in quite distinctly different ways.

References

Barron, Anne. 2000. Spectacular jurisprudence. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 20(2). 301–315.10.1093/ojls/20.2.301Search in Google Scholar

Belfiore, Eleonora & Oliver Bennett. 2007. Determinants of impact: Towards a better understanding of encounters with the arts. Cultural Trends 16(3). 225–275.10.1080/09548960701479417Search in Google Scholar

Bennett, Tony. 2005. Civic laboratories. Museums, cultural objecthood and the governance of the social. Cultural Studies 19(5). 521–547.10.4324/9780203332320-13Search in Google Scholar

Bergson, Henri. 1911 [1907]. Creative evolution. New York: Henry Holt.10.5962/bhl.title.166289Search in Google Scholar

Bergson, Henri. 1967 [1932]. Les deux sources de la morale et de la religion. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.10.14375/NP.9782369434184Search in Google Scholar

Beunders, Henri. 2007. The end of arrogance, the advent of persuasion: Public art in a multicultural society. Social Analysis 51(1). 42–57.10.2307/j.ctt1btbxxg.5Search in Google Scholar

Blum, Andrea et al. 1989. From the other side: Public artists on public art. Art Journal 48(4). 336–346.10.1080/00043249.1989.10792652Search in Google Scholar

Bonnett, Alastair, Houston Conwill, Patricia Johanson, Joyce Korloff, Alan Sonfist, George Sugarman, John Weber & Elyn Zimmerman. 2009. The dilemmas of radical nostalgia in British psychogeography. Theory, Culture & Society 26. 45–70.10.1177/0263276408099015Search in Google Scholar

Burk, Adrienne L. 2006. Beneath and before: Continuums of publicness in public art. Social & Cultural Geography 7(6). 949–964.10.1080/14649360601055862Search in Google Scholar

Clements, Paul. 2008. Public art: Radical, functional or democratic methodologies? Journal of Visual Arts Practice 7(1). 19–35.10.1386/jvap.7.1.19_1Search in Google Scholar

Cordes, Joseph J. & Robert S. Goldfarb. 2007. Decreasing the “bad” for mixed public goods and bads: The case of public sculpture. Eastern Economic Journal 33(2). 159–176.10.1057/eej.2007.15Search in Google Scholar

Cruikshank, Jeffrey & Pam Korza. 1988. Going public: A field guide to developments in art in public places. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Arts Extension ServiceSearch in Google Scholar

Davey, Nicholas. 2005. Aesthetic f(r)iction: The conflicts of visual experience. Journal of Visual Art Practice 4(2–3). 135–149.10.1386/jvap.4.2and3.135/1Search in Google Scholar

Deleuze, Gilles & Felix Guattari. 1980. Mille plateaux. Paris: Editions de Minuit.Search in Google Scholar

Deutsche, Rosalyn. 1996. Evictions: Art and spatial politics. Cambridge: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Diamond, Beth. 2004. Awakening the public realm: Instigating democratic space. Landscape Journal 23. 22–39.10.3368/lj.23.1.22Search in Google Scholar

Fitzpatrick, Peter. 2001. Modernism and the grounds of law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511549601Search in Google Scholar

Fleming, Ronald Lee & Melissa Tapper Goldman. 2005. Public art for the public. Public Interest 159. 55–76Search in Google Scholar

Gormley, Antony & Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council. 1998. Making an angel. London: Booth-Clibborn.Search in Google Scholar

Hamilton, Juliet, Leslie Forsyth & Daniel De Jongh. 2001. Public art: A local authority perspective. Journal of Urban Design 6(3). 283–296.10.1080/13574800120105797Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, Harriet. 2012. Geography and art. An expanding field: Site, the body, and practice. Progress in Human Geography 37(1). 52–71.10.1177/0309132512442865Search in Google Scholar

Hutchinson, Mark. 2002. Four stages of public art. Third Text 16(4). 429–438.10.1080/0952882031000077666Search in Google Scholar

Jancovich, Leila. 2011. Great art for everyone? Engagement and participation policy in the arts. Cultural Trends 20(3/4). 271–279.10.1080/09548963.2011.589708Search in Google Scholar

Joy, Annamma & John F. Sherry. 2003. Speaking of art as embodied imagination: A multisensory approach to understanding aesthetic experience. Journal of Consumer Research 30. 259–282.10.1086/376802Search in Google Scholar

Kelly, Michael. 2001. Public art controversy: The Serra and Lin cases. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 54(1). 15–22.10.1111/1540_6245.jaac54.1.0015Search in Google Scholar

Kwon, Mwon. 1997. One place after another: Notes on site specificity. October 80. 85–110.10.2307/778809Search in Google Scholar

Leder, Helmut, Benno Belke, Andries Oeberst & Dorothee Augustin. 2004. A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology 95. 489–508.10.1348/0007126042369811Search in Google Scholar

Levine, Caroline. 2002. The paradox of public art: Democratic space, the avant-garde, and Richard Serra’s “Tilted Arc.” Philosophy & Geography 5(1). 51–68.10.1080/10903770120116831Search in Google Scholar

Levinson, Sanford. 1998. Written in stone: Public monuments in changing societies. Durham: Duke University Press.10.1215/9781478004349Search in Google Scholar

Miles, Malcolm. 1997. Art, space, and the city: Public art and urban futures. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Miles, Malcolm. 2005. Interruptions: Testing the rhetoric of culturally lead development. Urban Studies 42(5/6). 889–911.10.1080/00420980500107375Search in Google Scholar

Moore, Nathan. 2007. Icons of control: Deleuze, signs, law. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 20. 33–54.10.1007/s11196-006-9035-8Search in Google Scholar

Phillips, Patricia. 1989. Temporality and public art. Art Journal 48(4). 331–335.10.1080/00043249.1989.10792651Search in Google Scholar

Pollock, Venda Louise & Ronan Paddison. 2010. Embedding public art: Practice, policy and problems. Journal of Urban Design 15(3). 335–356.10.1080/13574809.2010.487810Search in Google Scholar

Princenthal, Nancy. 2003. In praise of anachronism: On public art and its critics. ArtUS (Nov./Dec.). 24–28.Search in Google Scholar

Selwood, Sara. 1995. The benefits of public art: The polemics of permanent art in public places. London: Policy Studies Institute.Search in Google Scholar

Sharp, Joanne, Venda Pollock & Ronan Paddison. 2005. Just art for a just city: Public art and social inclusion in urban generation. Urban Studies 42(5/6). 1001–1023.10.4324/9781315878768-9Search in Google Scholar

Tilghman, Benjamin. 2006. Reflections on aesthetic judgment and other essays. Aldershot: Ashgate.Search in Google Scholar

Visconti, Luca, John Sherry, Jr., Stefania Borghini & Laurel Anderson. 2010. Street art, sweet art? Reclaiming the “public” in public space. Journal of Consumer Research 57. 511–529.10.1086/652731Search in Google Scholar

Wagner, A. 2011. French urban space management: A visual semiotic approach behind power and control. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 24(2). 227–242.10.1007/s11196-010-9206-5Search in Google Scholar

Wagner, A. 2014. Game of power within the French urban landscape: A socio-legal semiotic analysis of communication, vision and space. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law 27(1). 161–182.10.1007/s11196-013-9327-8Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2017-4-14
Published in Print: 2017-5-24

© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. La sémiotique juridique verbale et nonverbale comme stratégie de communication du droit: Signs, symbols, and meanings in law
  3. “Verbal and nonverbal” in semiotics
  4. The frowning balance: Semiotic insinuations on the visual rhetoric of justice
  5. Semiotics of visual evidence in law
  6. Observing laws through “understanding eyes”
  7. Interpreting law in socio-pragmatic space
  8. Conceptualizing cultural discrepancies in legal translation: A case-based study
  9. The first integrated practice of legal translation in modern China: A study of the Chinese translation of Elements of International Law, 1864
  10. Translations of early Sino-British treaties and the masked western legal concepts
  11. “Susanna and the Elders”: On the visual semiotic of shame
  12. Angels, warriors, and beacons: Totemic law, territorial coding, and monumental sculpture in post-industrial landscapes
  13. Expiration dates: Performative illusions of law and regulation
  14. From immunity to immunity. From immunity to silence: The case of Gilad Sharon
  15. Under western eyes: Articulation between indigenous justice and the national judicial system
  16. Police interpreting: The facts sheet
  17. The influence of legal tradition on Italian arbitration discourse
  18. Weighing and balancing of principles in cases with rule paradoxes
  19. “You have to teach the judge what to do”: Semiotic gaps between unrepresented litigants and the common law
  20. The semiotic interpretation of legal subjects in China’s new criminal procedure law
  21. Mission impossible? Judges’ playing of dual roles as adjudicator and mediator in Chinese court conciliation
  22. “Is it the case that … ?”: Building toward findings of fact in Japanese criminal trials
  23. Institutional interaction in traffic law enforcement in China: Resistance and obedience
  24. Duppying yoots in a dog eat dog world, kmt: Determining the senses of slang terms for the Courts
  25. Les structures sémantiques profondes du code pénal chinois
Downloaded on 10.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/sem-2015-0069/html
Scroll to top button